After giving the public one day to become "Explorers" of its $1,500 face-computer, Google has shut its online store saying that "all spots have been claimed".
The company announced the withdrawal of Glass sales to the hoi polloi on Tuesday night following a one day sale during which the company "sold out" of the tech in white …

Re: Simple idea:

What fashion statement? As some have already pointed out, wearing Google Glass is like wearing a leisure suit. Only a matter of time before it's standard garb on TV to indicate a character is a sleazebag.

Re: Simple idea:

A moment's thought will show that for some people, and if they come to call our butlers will throw them, along with their visiting cards, into the rose manure, a leisure suit is obviously a fashion statement. Similarly for Glass.

Because we happen to have superior taste and discrimination doesn't mean that the great unwashed agrees with us. I believe, for instance, that there are some people who emulate the "Kardashians", which turn out not to be the shipowners I originally assumed, but a set of blow-up dolls.

I found Glass quite useful, to be honest

I wonder how much it costs to make one of these

Not like there's that much Google funded development going on that isn't also leveraged elsewhere. Charging people for the privilege to develop the "killer app" and provide the majority of both content and advertising, and at an obscene premium, is the business model all in itself.

It'd be like begging for a chance to pay $1500 USD for a Newton, and waiting for someone in the "user community" to attempt the handwriting recognition software.

Re: I wonder how much it costs to make one of these

I think the whole concept of the tech is a solution looking for a problem. But that's true of tons of tech, so no big deal I suppose.

But as far as paying to get to develop for it, Google can't even cover the costs of the retail packaging if that 10k estimate from El Reg is remotely accurate, there's no money there.

In other industries everybody pays for 'lab' or 'experiment' kits and the idea is two fold:

- Of course there's a bit if lock-in at play if the $15k kit is a big outlay for you

but

- The actual model is designed to pay the staffing costs of the R&D teams that put the kits together and come up with the 'starter recipies' outlined in the kits.

I suspect Google is in the second camp. Nearly 12% of all my internal R&D is offset by the sales of experiment kits we put together for people considering investing in our Ti casting process. It's mostly shitloads of data, some extremely complex software that's really easy to use, and gas samples so they can see if things in their facilities are going to be damaged or destroyed if exposed to the gasses in the process.

It's small expense that covers a big hunk of an enormous cost center. Pretty much every material provider and machine and tooling manufacturer does the same thing and it's wonderful for everybody involved. We've got a very advanced facility and there's little that's going to slip by us, but spending $20k or whatever for tiny samples has enabled us to verify our assumptions and more than once enough concern was generated to warrant ejecting another path. It's no different with Google. People can decide if they want to invest serious money in software development for no risk ($1.5k, but if that's a roadblock you've got bigger problems to deal with).

It's smart for everyone. But isn't a profit generator. It's more of a loss mitigation tactic.

Re: I wonder how much it costs to make one of these

Maybe it's a loss leader to get enough distribution, after that it's money for data acquisition galore. I recall a gag called Google Homeview a few years back by a German TV show - this could actually become reality now. Ugh.

Re: I wonder how much it costs to make one of these

They're not paying for the privilege to develop, they're paying for the hardware. And when early developer kits for new hardware like consoles or whatever else appear, I thought it's pretty standard that you have to pay.

I don't know about a failed Newton, but it's like selling console developer kits to games companies and asking them to write games. You know, like how it happens all the time.

Re: I wonder how much it costs to make one of these

that assumes the staff and all the other expenses are not being utilized by other programs, which I suspect they are. R&D teams are not solely working on Glass but are both working off of other projects before them as well as producing advances that are monetized in other products.

If Google were a small company that was trying to develop HUDs only, then I'd agree with your example completely. But I'd bet my last dollar and yours that advances made by the Glass team are incorporated in other products that already profit and help subsidize the whole thing.

$1,500 ?

Google might be the leader, plenty more on the way!

Visitors to this years CES were treated to, on several stands, different VR glass concepts.

Epson, Lumus, Optinvent, and Sony all were showing off their prowess in the field.

Some are Glass designs whilst others totally obscure the eyes. Evena Glasses combine the two formats but hardly make them acceptable for social occasions.

Corrective eyewear users know many things have to be considered when purchasing - things that ordinary non-users overlook. Balance - will all the elctronics concentrated on one arm cause the glasses to tilt?

Samsung has a patent filing for a device hung on an ear - in my experience ear mounted devices as simple as a microphone can be a real pain in use.

For Plod, cable free units using Bluetooth are a security weakness - Bluetooth jammers, even 'smart' jammers with channel skipping (for the channel you use) only cost a few Pounds/Dollars/Dong in GuangZhou.

With the rash of cell handset 'grab and run' thefts, the present Google Glass just presents another opportunity for neardowell's to enrich themselves.